|
|
Post by buckone1 on May 17, 2018 15:16:16 GMT -5
Hunters in Martin county might as well give up on turkey hunting in this county.
The bobcats have taken over and soon ther will be no birds to hunt! Due to the non rule change!
|
|
|
|
Post by nfalls116 on May 17, 2018 15:34:00 GMT -5
Hunters in Martin county might as well give up on turkey hunting in this county. The bobcats have taken over and soon ther will be no birds to hunt! Due to the non rule change! Did you voice your opinion to the dnr? |
|
|
|
Post by buckone1 on May 18, 2018 15:06:58 GMT -5
Yes I did voice my opinion as many hunters did, but to no avail. The people that opposed it had a greater voice, and had no idea about the damage the bobcats are doing to our wildlife!
They meant well but are just plain stupid!!
|
|
|
|
Post by nfalls116 on May 18, 2018 15:11:00 GMT -5
I always trust the dnr to make the appropriate decisions based on facts and not emotion. It’s pretty much the only branch of government that I have a general trust of.
|
|
|
|
Post by whitetaildave24 on May 19, 2018 13:11:26 GMT -5
I’m going to go out on a limb here and say the nest robbing critters do way more damage then the bobcats do.
|
|
|
|
Post by Woody Williams on May 19, 2018 14:39:57 GMT -5
I’m going to go out on a limb here and say the nest robbing critters do way more damage then the bobcats do. here, here! I think that is a big strong limb that you are on there! |
|
|
|
Post by buckone1 on May 19, 2018 15:00:23 GMT -5
I don't agree!
|
|
|
|
Post by featherduster on May 19, 2018 15:11:53 GMT -5
I’m going to go out on a limb here and say the nest robbing critters do way more damage then the bobcats do.  |
|
|
|
Post by nfalls116 on May 19, 2018 15:30:46 GMT -5
Yeah I’d say if you set up a bunch of trail cams you’d find more skunks eating eggs than bobcats
|
|
|
|
Post by Woody Williams on May 19, 2018 15:58:17 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Woody Williams on May 19, 2018 20:19:05 GMT -5
The Administrative Rules Process...
Here is how I see it -
The DNR is legally bound to take suggestions from the Indiana public, hunters or not. They do this through their GotInput session. Anybody can suggest anything and they often do. Some suggestions are real doozies! From these suggestions the DNR will consider which ones are feasible.
In the case of a new season on a critter that we have not been able to trap or hunt before it then becomes a question will the population allow it? In the two past cases (Otters and bobcats) the DNR said yes the population could stand, and benefit, from a limited season in specific counties, so they proposed it for FURTHER public input. They do not say, ”We are going to push this through no matter what public input to the DNR and NRC that we get”.
As in the bobcat proposal and the “rifle” proposal we can see that is never a “done deal” until the NRC finally adopts it. The DNR, NRC and the Administrative Law Judge weighs in on the final decision, using all input data at hand.
If there is an overwhelming number of negative comments and/or those comments are more persuasive then there is a good chance that either the DNR or the NRC will thumb the proposal down.
Just because the DNR offers up a proposal does not necessarily mean they are 100% behind it. They are fulfilling their obligation from GotInput.
IMO – The DNR did not present the case well and some of that is no fault of their own. The antis were crying “what is the bobcat population numbers”? The DNR did not have a good answer as how in the world can they come up with a good number on such a secretive, mostly nocturnal animal? The DNR does not even make an educated guess on deer in the state.
Personally I get a little tired of the DNR catching heck when they are fulfilling their obligation without running roughshod over the process.
YMMV…
.
|
|
|
|
Post by lawrencecountyhunter on May 20, 2018 8:44:37 GMT -5
I always trust the dnr to make the appropriate decisions based on facts and not emotion. It’s pretty much the only branch of government that I have a general trust of. It's my understanding that the DNR attempted to do just that by proposing the season. The NRC shot it down due to the negative public input, much of which apparently came from out of state and even out of country. |
|
|
|
Post by buckone1 on May 20, 2018 14:51:44 GMT -5
I agree that the DNR doe's a good job on reg's and enforcement. They proposed the taking of bobcats for a reason.
I guess we will see in a year or two if they listened to the right people'
|
|
|
|
Post by moose1am on May 22, 2018 10:12:20 GMT -5
The Administrative Rules Process...Here is how I see it - The DNR is legally bound to take suggestions from the Indiana public, hunters or not. They do this through their GotInput session. Anybody can suggest anything and they often do. Some suggestions are real doozies! From these suggestions the DNR will consider which ones are feasible. In the case of a new season on a critter that we have not been able to trap or hunt before it then becomes a question will the population allow it? In the two past cases (Otters and bobcats) the DNR said yes the population could stand, and benefit, from a limited season in specific counties, so they proposed it for FURTHER public input. They do not say, ”We are going to push this through no matter what public input to the DNR and NRC that we get”. As in the bobcat proposal and the “rifle” proposal we can see that is never a “done deal” until the NRC finally adopts it. The DNR, NRC and the Administrative Law Judge weighs in on the final decision, using all input data at hand. If there is an overwhelming number of negative comments and/or those comments are more persuasive then there is a good chance that either the DNR or the NRC will thumb the proposal down. Just because the DNR offers up a proposal does not necessarily mean they are 100% behind it. They are fulfilling their obligation from GotInput. IMO – The DNR did not present the case well and some of that is no fault of their own. The antis were crying “what is the bobcat population numbers”? The DNR did not have a good answer as how in the world can they come up with a good number on such a secretive, mostly nocturnal animal? The DNR does not even make an educated guess on deer in the state. Personally I get a little tired of the DNR catching heck when they are fulfilling their obligation without running roughshod over the process. YMMV… .Very Well Said Woody. They IDNR F&W Division needs to get good population numbers on a species that's hard to see in the daylight. The only way they can get good population numbers would be to set out thousands of IR camera and that is cost prohibitive. It's a good thing we don't have NRC asking IDNR F&W to produce population numbers on all the other species that we hunt. I'm sure if there is a way to get the data that the IDNR will dot it. |
|
|
|
Post by duff on May 22, 2018 21:36:57 GMT -5
There are very huntable populations in Indiana. DNR has the data they need.
There will never be the right data for most who are against the idea.
|
|
|
|
Post by firstwd on May 23, 2018 6:28:59 GMT -5
If you remember, coyotes weren't a "real" problem and the DNR sided with the P.E.T.A. type groups and eliminated the live sale market. Trappers told everybody then that coyote populations would be high enough within 5 years to cause urban issues. They were wrong, it was less than 3 years.
I guess if small pets start getting snatched and kids start running in fear in and around the suburbs, then maybe the general public will believe the bobcat population needs controlled.
|
|
|
|
Post by greghopper on May 23, 2018 7:06:54 GMT -5
If you remember, coyotes weren't a "real" problem and the DNR sided with the P.E.T.A. type groups and eliminated the live sale market. Trappers told everybody then that coyote populations would be high enough within 5 years to cause urban issues. They were wrong, it was less than 3 years. I guess if small pets start getting snatched and kids start running in fear in and around the suburbs, then maybe the general public will believe the bobcat population needs controlled. No sure how you got "the DNR sided with the P.E.T.A. type groups"..... but here is some factual information on why it was stopped. www.heraldbulletin.com/news/local_news/a-m-indiana-retools-coyote-hunting-law-to-end-illegal/article_8b71a951-1dc5-561f-8e36-0e2187ff2929.html |
|
|
|
Post by firstwd on May 23, 2018 10:07:31 GMT -5
If you remember, coyotes weren't a "real" problem and the DNR sided with the P.E.T.A. type groups and eliminated the live sale market. Trappers told everybody then that coyote populations would be high enough within 5 years to cause urban issues. They were wrong, it was less than 3 years. I guess if small pets start getting snatched and kids start running in fear in and around the suburbs, then maybe the general public will believe the bobcat population needs controlled. No sure how you got "the DNR sided with the P.E.T.A. type groups"..... but here is some factual information on why it was stopped. www.heraldbulletin.com/news/local_news/a-m-indiana-retools-coyote-hunting-law-to-end-illegal/article_8b71a951-1dc5-561f-8e36-0e2187ff2929.htmlBecause the meetings were filled with those types of groups, just like the bobcat meetings, promoting inaccurate information to get their way. Yes, that article contains some facts but I wouldn't label it a factual reason it was closed. |
|
|
|
Post by greghopper on May 23, 2018 10:42:30 GMT -5
So your ok with selling OUR live resources for personal gains?
And being know as ground zero for all the illegal activity in the Midwest live market ..... almost all illegal activity lead back to Indiana! That's nothing I would want be proud of.... IMO
BTW .... coyotes can still be trapped live or dead and also be Hunted in Indiana.
|
|
|
|
Post by throbak on May 23, 2018 12:32:47 GMT -5
Greg you just described the Commercial Fishermen Taking our Catfish and supplying the Pay lake industry I’m not ok with that either
|
|
